Single? You Still Need an Estate Plan

Many people believe that if they are single, they don't need a will and other estate planning documents. However, estate planning is just as important for single people as it is for couples and families.

Estate planning allows you to ensure that your property will go to the people you want, in the way you want, and when you want. If you do not have an estate plan, the state will decide who gets your property and who will make decisions for you should you become incapacitated. An estate plan can also help you save on estate taxes and on court costs for your loved ones.

The most basic estate planning document is a will. If you do not have a will directing who will inherit your assets, your estate will be distributed according to state law. If you are single, most states provide that your estate will go to your children or to other living relatives if you don't have children. If you have absolutely no living relatives, then your estate will go to the state. You may not want to leave your entire estate to relatives -- you may have close friends or charities that you feel should get something. Without a will, you have no way of directing where your property goes.

Many single people have significant others, perhaps with whom they live.  Unfortunately, without a will, it is unlikely that any of your estate will benefit your significant other, even if you live together.  Moreover, your significant other may lose important real or personal property, creating great hardship.  At a minimum a simple will can resolve some of these issues.

If you are single and have a child, you may be initially comforted by the fact that your estate benefits your child upon your passing.  What may concern you, however,  is that without an estate plan, you can't be sure who manages the estate you leave to your children.  Often, the determination of who manages your estate makes a difference in whether the assets are best managed for the benefit of your child.   

The next most important document is a durable power of attorney. A power of attorney allows a person you appoint -- your "attorney-in-fact" or "agent" -- to act in your place for financial purposes when and if you ever become incapacitated. In that case, the person you choose will be able to step in and take care of your financial affairs. Without a durable power of attorney, no one can represent you unless a court appoints a conservator or guardian. That court process takes time, costs money, and the judge may not choose the person you would prefer.

In addition, you should have a health care proxy. Similar to a power of attorney, a health care proxy allows an individual to appoint someone else to act as their agent, but for medical, as opposed to financial, decisions. Unlike married individuals, unmarried partners or friends usually can't make decisions for each other without signed authorization.

If you are planning to give away a lot of your money, there are ways to do that efficiently through the annual gift tax exclusion and charitable remainder trusts. Other estate planning documents to consider are a revocable living trust and a living will.

Don't think that because you are single, you don't need an estate plan. Contact your elder law attorney to find out what estate planning documents you need.

Live Up to Your Commitment to the Nursing Home, or Beware

A recent Connecticut case highlights the risk to family members of nursing home residents who don't live up to their financial commitments to such facilities.

When her mother was admitted to the Cook Willow Health Center, Judy Andrien signed an admission agreement on behalf of her mother as "responsible relative," agreeing to take steps to ensure that the nursing home would be paid from her mother's assets or by Medicaid.

The facility sued Ms. Andrien, claiming that she did not live up to this commitment. Ms. Andrien asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that she cannot be held liable because she did not agree to use her own funds to pay for her mother's care.  

The Superior Court of Connecticut has ruled in the facility's favor, stating that the claim is not that Ms. Andrien personally guaranteed payment, but that she is in breach of contract for not using her mother's funds to pay the nursing home or taking steps to get her mother Medicaid coverage. The court's ruling means that the case will continue to trial on the nursing home's claim, which it still must prove.

Nursing Homes Overcharge Medicare More than One Billion Dollars Annually

Hundreds of nursing homes overcharge Medicare every year for so-called skilled services, adding $1.5 billion in annual costs to the program, according to a federal report.  About one-fourth of Medicare bills from facilities examined in the report were incorrect. The majority of these claims involved  "upcoding," where a nursing home or other provider inflates the cost of its bill to Medicare by claiming more intensive services were done than actually performed.

 In other cases, nursing homes provided treatments that were inappropriate for the patient.  Documents show that facilities billed for high-intensity work, such as speech therapy and occupational therapy, that went to patients who couldn't benefit from it. One patient under hospice care refused physical therapy but was given the therapy anyway, and Medicare was billed, officials said.

The report was prepared by the The Office of Investigations (OI), which  conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of fraud and misconduct related to Health and Human Service programs, operations, and beneficiaries.  OI utilizes its resources by actively coordinating with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities.  The investigative efforts of OI often lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties.

In recent years, the Office of Inspector General had identified a number of problems with billing by skilled nursing facilities (SNF), including the submission of inaccurate, medically unnecessary, and fraudulent claims.  Further, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission has raised concerns about SNFs’ improperly billing for therapy to obtain additional Medicare payments.  In fiscal year (FY) 2012, Medicare paid $32.2 billion for SNF services.

The Report made a number of recommendations.  Recognizing that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) had recently made several significant changes to SNF payments, the Report stated that    "more needs to be done to reduce inappropriate payments to SNFs."  Accordingly,   it was suggested that   CMS:  (1) increase and expand reviews of SNF claims, (2) use its Fraud Prevention System to identify SNFs that  are billing for higher paying services, (3) monitor compliance with new therapy assessments, (4) change the current method for determining how much therapy is needed to ensure appropriate payments, (5) improve the accuracy of Minimum Data Set items, and (6) follow up on the SNFs that billed in error.  CMS concurred with all six recommendations.

A Minnesota probate court rules that language in the state's constitution that prohibits all people under guardianship from voting violates the United States Constitution and is therefore invalid.  In re Guardianship of Erickson(4^th Jud. Dist. Ct., Minn., No. 27-GC-PR-09-57, Oct. 4, 2012).

Brian Erickson was placed under guardianship in 2009 because he suffers from schizophrenia and dysthymia with psychotic tendencies that make it difficult for him to perform many activities of daily living.  In July 2012, Mr. Erickson's guardian filed a petition with the Hennepin County Probate Court seeking a declaratory judgment clarifying that people under guardianship retain the right to vote unless a court order removes that right. 

The petition was filed because there is a conflict between Minnesota Statute 524.313, which states that "unless otherwise ordered by the court, the ward retains the right to vote," and Article VII of the state constitution, which explicitly states that all people under guardianship are not allowed to vote.  Mr. Erickson attempted to reconcile these two provisions by claiming that since the state constitution did not define guardianship, the legislature could "effectuate the constitutional mandates" by passing statutes that limited the state's ability to disenfranchise people under guardianship.

Actor Sherman Hemsley Remains Not Laid to Rest as Legal Dispute Continues

Sherman Hemsley died at his home in El Paso, Texas on July 24. But three months on, the star of the CBS series “The Jeffersons” has yet to be laid to rest as the beneficiaries of his will, and even his cause of death, have been called into question.

A worker at the Eastside location of the San Jose Funeral Home in El Paso, Texas confirmed that Hemsley was still at the home, and that they were waiting for a court order telling them what to do with his body.

It was revealed in August that Hemsley’s body had not been buried amid a legal dispute between his former manager and self-proclaimed business partner and live-in best friend Flora Enchinton – who was named as the sole beneficiary in his will – and a Philadelphia man, Richard Thornton, who claims to be the actor’s brother. Thornton filed a civil lawsuit disputing the validity of the will, signed by Hemsley one month prior to his death.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/10/29/sherman-hemsley-still-not-buried-3-months-after-death-bizarre-legal-dispute/?intcmp=features#ixzz2Ai8pneZS